Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/12/1985 Meeting I \ M I NUT E S e City Council Dinner Session Eugene Conference Center--Wi1der Room August 12, 1985 5:30 p.m. PRESENT: Brian Obie, mayor; Cynthia Wooten, Ruth Bascom, Debra Ehrman, Jeff Miller (until 6:45 p.m.), Freeman Holmer, Roger Rutan, councilors; Dave Whitlow, assistant city manager; Cathy Freedman, City Manager1s Office; Barb Bellamy, public information director; Warren Wong, Carol Calkins, ASD/Finance; Gary Long, ASD; Jim Boyd, Jackman Wilson, The Register-Guard; Tracy Berry, KEZI. Mr. Obie opened the meeting and said it was intended as a review and update of the town hall and service club meetings on the Eugene Agenda. He added that several meetings still were planned, and he suggested discussing direction and areas needing further research. Ms. Bellamy said about six meetings remained, in addition to the booth at the County Fair. She also said about 1,000 feedback forms had been received, with about 25 percent mailed in and the rest turned in at community meetings. e She displayed information on the priorities chosen by respondents, saying the airport, with 77 percent, and general capital improvements (CIP), with 71 per- cent, had received the greatest amount of support as top or second priority. Sixty-two percent of respondents gave the airport top priority. Ms. Bellamy said the Riverfront Project, downtown improvements, the transpor- tation system, and the library had received support near the 50 percent level, and entrance beautification and the swimming pool were supported by about 30 percent. Ms. Bellamy also presented findings on the financing for the projects. She said 52 percent had indicated they were willing to pay some sort of income tax, either 1/4, 1/2, or 3/4. percent. She cautioned that the sample was based on voluntary participation and said it probably did not include those people who were undecided. Of those supporting the income tax, Ms. Bellamy said most had favored the 1/2 percent, with the rest divided about equally between 1/4, and 3/4. Twenty-nine percent of respondents indicated they were not willing to pay an income tax. Ms. Bellamy added that only about five forms were turned in with responses that the presentations were not helpful, and most had said the meetings were helpful and the opportunity to talk with councilors was appreciated. - MINUTES--City Council Dinner Session August 12, 1985 ~~1 She distributed copies of a memo, dated August 9,1985, containing information e about the responses. The order of priorities was: l. Airport improvements 2. CIP 3. Li bra ry 4. Riverfront Project 5. Downtown 6. Transportation 7. Entrance Beautifi ca tion 8. Swimming Pool Mr. Rutan asked Ms. Bellamy if she felt there was a significant breaking point in the amount of support necessary for a project to be approved. She said the figures also depended on the number not responding to a question, but an indi- cation of 50 percent or more probably was significant. Mr. Rutan said he fe1 t that unless there was a significant difference in numbers, public support probably was not strong. Ms. Bascom said she felt the ratings in the "not important" column were signi- ficant, and she noted that the least number of respondents had rated the 1 ibrary as not important, placing it ahead of the airport in terms of support, but not as important in terms of timing. She added that she fe1 t those fac- tors should be taken into account when designing projects to appeal to voters. Ms. Wooten said she felt the downtown development numbers were interesting, e and she suggested that the presentations possibly had been unclear. Mr. Holmer said the same might be true of the transportation system numbers. Ms. Wooten said the downtown development plan was basically the pending pro- posal on the Price Development Project. She said the possibility of paying for the pUblic side of the infrastructure requirement for new downtown devel- opment through tax increment money had been discussed in the past, and what remained unclear was where improvements for the balance of the downtown plan were in the agenda--whether they were under downtown development, transpor- tation, or capital improvements. She added that better technical information was needed in those areas. Ms. Ehrman reminded the council that a large portion of the community still had not been heard from. Mr. Rutan asked about the 19 percent not accounted for in the financing figures, and Ms. Bellamy said they either had not responded or had favored some other type of tax, such as a property tax, sales tax, or user fee. Ms. Wooten requested a separate breakdown of the figures from town hall meet- ings and those from service clubs, and Ms. Bascom also requested figures from the mailed-in forms. Mr. Obie said he was interested in why the CIP had received such a high response, and he suggested that perhaps citizens fe1 t existing infrastructure shou1 d be ma inta ined. Ms. Ehrman suggested that another reason for the responses might be the ties to federal revenue sharing. e MINUTES--City Council Dinner Session August 12, 198~_ Pa ge 2 Mr. Whitlow said specific lists of projects were available by department, by - project, and by ward. Ms. Wooten requested copies. Mr. Holmer said transportation had the third best response in terms of those ra ting it not importa nt. Mr. Obie asked members to give their impressions from the meetings they had attended. Mr. Miller said he sensed a general feeling that the airport needed improve- ments, but he also noted a desire to consider broader-based income sources for financing. He also said many residents felt that not all of the projects had been clearly related to economic development, and he said there was a need to communicate the indirect benefits of projects. He said he was not sure about the income tax as a source of financing, and added that he found the 52 per- cent figure surprising. He sa i d he sensed a nervousness about the income tax, and he also said he had noted feelings that some projects, such as downtown development, the library, and the pool, could wait for better economic times. Ms. Ehrman said she agreed that a concern existed about distributing the burden of airport improvements beyond Eugene. She also sa i d suggestions ha d been ITBde to improve the airport in increments. She said a fa irly good response had been received on the Riverfront Project, along with the same criticisms that have been heard at other meetings. Ms. Ehrman sa i d she had noted feelings that the transportation systems could wait, although she had emphasized that the systems would serve the fastest growing area toward the e west. She said one criticism of the entrance beautification project was the feel ing that businesses benefiting would not be charged accordingly. She reported good support for 1 ibrary expansion and sa id her ward wanted Jefferson Pool replaced. She also said concern had been expressed that the proposed pool would be smaller than the Jefferson Pool and that the purpose of the conference rooms was unclear, and added that it still was difficult to explain why Jefferson cannot be fixed. Ms. EhrlTBn said she had encountered an overwhelmingly negative response to the income tax at her first meeting, but had noticed a favorable response at the second meeting. She suggested putting the tax issue to a vote and said she had tried to emphasize exactly where the funds would go. She a 1 so sa i d no t much concern had been expressed about the low-income exemptions or the phasedin approach. She added that about 20 to 35 people generally had been in attendance and said people had expressed their appreciation for the rreetings. Ms. EhrlTBn said she had noticed no differences in the groups with differing responses, and she added that some concern had been expressed about how the sales tax would fit in. She said she felt the agenda might have a better chance of approval if the sales tax fails, although some people had felt that a local sales tax might be a viable option. Mr. Miller said some concern about the tax had been expressed by senior citi- zens, and they had seemed relieved that with an income tax, ITBny seniors would not have to pay. e MINUTES--City Council Dinner Session August 12,1985 Pa ge 3 Ms. Bascom said she had attended three meetings, with about 30 to 55 people at e ea ch. She said she felt there was a need for education and clarification on the Riverfront Project and added that she was hopeful that support cou1 d be achieved with information. Ms. Wooten said she felt there had been a failure to communicate a precise vision of what the Riverfront Project was, who it would benefit, how it would be accomp1 ished, etc. Ms. Bascom said concerns also had been expressed at two meetings about making the ballot measures specific, and she said residents had been reluctant to think in different terms about community improvements. She added that some people had wanted to wait for the outcome of the sales tax vote, and said she had not noticed any specific opinions tied to the sales tax, but she did feel it would have some effect, pOssibly by lowering property taxes and making an income tax more acceptable. Mr. Holmer suggested that even if the state sales tax fails, a city sales tax might be acceptable. Ms. Bascom said she did not think a city sales tax could be realized. Ms. Bascom said a County gas tax had been suggested as a way of financing transportation system improvements, and Mr. Miller said he had heard that suggestion as well. Ms. Bascom a1 so noted that only 94, peop1 e out of 1,000 had said the 1 ibrary was not important. Ms. Wooten said the small service-related business people she had spoken with generally were not committing to an income tax. She sa i d concern had been expressed about whether the income tax wou1 d apply to small businesses and whether that was fair or counterproductive. She said she had noted general It support for the airport, with concerns about phasing in expansion and about the information used to justify expansion. Ms. Wooten sa id a vision was needed for the Riverfront Project, and she sug- gested developing an explanatory brochure. She said people interested in downtown development had suggested engaging in more aggressive retail devel- opment efforts, possibly including rent subsidies and going through agents to attract major reta i1 ers. She said the need for transpOrtation systems beyond those already planned had not been understood, and she noted a general lack of enthusiasm for those projects. Regarding entrance beautification, Ms. Wooten said she had noticed a need for better planning at the time of street widening or improvements, and she said simple, inexpensive projects were favored, to be paid for through a local gas tax. She said people appeared to support 1 ibrary expansion, but strongly preferred that it be done at the existing site, and Ms. Ehrman agreed. Ms. Wooten also said a replacement for Jefferson Pool was desired, and she said residents still did not believe Jefferson was beyond repair. She sa i d strong support exi sted for capi tal improvements, but more speci fic informa tion was desired. Ms. Wooten said she believed CIP had strong support because the direct benefits were clear to people, and she noted a need to clarify the benefits of projects. She added that she did not think an income tax wou1 d pass, even at 1/4,percent, but she did see strong support for a gas tax. e MINUTES--City Council Dinner Session August 12, 1985 Pa ge 4, Ms. Wooten also said she was worried about a general lack of trust in the City e as an institution. Ms. Bascom said she was aware of a "healthy suspicion" of all government and added she did not feel it was cause for fear or surprise. Ms. Ehrman said she had encountered some hostile reaction among people who felt that the decisions already had been made and that public input did not rea 11 y rra t te r . Mr. Rutan said he had noted a generally positive reception for roost projects, and he said he had spent most of the time answering questions and trying to clarify projects. One caveat reported by Mr. Rutan was that although the projects represent the kind of future the community wants, it was not will ing or able to pay for them right away. He said he had heard requests for roore metropolitan influence on the airport project, but not if that would delay the work. He reported general support for the Riverfront Project, once it was explained, and he said he felt the vision had once existed but had been lost. He also said several people had expressed interest in that project as a way of connecting the university and the private sector. Mr. Rutan sa i d the downtown development project was unclear, and he reported strong support for capital improvements, but said he had not noticed overwhelming support for the 1 ibrary. He said people he had talked to were skeptical of an income stream without some type of sunset clause, and he added that the rrain negative com- ment made was that too much had been thrown at people too quickly. He sa i d he fel t the meetings had provided one of the best opportunities for the City Council to talk with members of the community, and he noted that the general tone of the meetings he attended was more positive than those others had described. e Mr. Holmer agreed with Mr. Rutan about talking with the community and said his meetings also had included feel ings about the lack of trust and about region- alizing the airport. He said he felt the gas tax had a degree of support that justified further consideration, and suggestions had been rrade to turn the entrance beautifica tion projects over to service cl ubs. He said the overall conclusions were that the 1 ist was too long to sell, and that brief menus, each ti ed to a ta x, were preferred. He also said it had been difficult to explain the necessity of continuing operating and rraintenance costs for some of the projects. He said he doubted all eight projects could be sold at one time, and he had received recommendations to take separate groups to the voters. Mr. Miller said questions had been raised at the ward meetings he attended about whether high and low priority items would be lumped together, and he said people had wanted the opportunity to decide on individual items. Ms. Ehrman said she had understood that only the percentages would be on the ba 11 ot. Ms. Wooten said she agreed with the comments made by Mr. Rutan and Mr. Holmer about the opportunity for community involvement the meetings had provided, and she suggested that town hall meetings be held annually. Mr. Obie said he had asked Mr. Wong to prepare inforrration on credits or exemptions for low-income taxpayers. Mr. Wong distributed packets dated August 12, 1985. e MINUTES--City Council Dinner Session August 12,1985 Page 5 Ms. Bascom requested inform tion examining the possibil ity of a gas tax to e finance transportation projects, and Ms. Wooten requested a package examining alternatives to the income tax, such as putting the airport on a serial levy, withdrawing the Riverfront Project as self-financing, and re-examining options for the downtown project. Mr. Wong said a draft of a gas tax had been pre- pared last sumner. Ms. Wooten added that the 1 ibrary and the pool still were important to her, and she said she thought they would have to be financed either through community development block grant funds or through special bond mea sure son the ba 11 0 t. Mr. Whitlow said the council should let staff know as soon as possible if they intend to pursue other revenue sources, as it woul d require a lot of work before the deadl ine for ballot measures. Responding to Ms. Wootenls question, Mr. Wong said a 3 cent per gallon gas tax would yield about $1.5 million inside the city limits. Mr. Hol mer sa i d one person a t the meetings had pointed out how sna 11 the income tax alOOunt was and had suggested that no exemptions were needed. Mr. Wong sa i d the packet conta ined five scenarios of low-income credi ts or exemptions. He said exemptions would leave a portion of income untaxed, while credits would entail refunds of the tax liability owed. Mr. Wong said a separate credit form would be used for the city tax, and the instruction book- let woul d come out of City administra tive costs. He reviewed the various options and their losses, and he noted that the exemptions would involve a e discontinuity at the breaking point, meaning that the entire tax would be charged if the income amount is one dollar over the limit, and he said that was the reason for the sequential credits on the first two pages. Mr. Obie suggested getting the infornation to Mr. Miller. Mr. Holmer noted that the exemptions would benefit the high-income earner more drastically than the low-income earner. Responding to Mr. Obie IS question about regional funding of the airport, Mr. Wong sa i d about 38 percent of the income earned in Eugene wa s by non- resi dents. Ms. Ehrman said she had heard figures stating that about 40 per- cent of the airport business was from people outside of Eugene. Mr. Obie asked about financing capital projects by maintaining a fixed debt service levy. Mr. Wong distributed those analyses. Mr. Wong said about hal f of the outstanding debt would be paid off in the next five years, and he said r.t>ody's had expressed concern that Eugene was not issuing more debt. He said if the existing rate per thousand in debt service is mintained at $1.30/1,000, two scenarios were possible. Under version A, assuming no growth in assessed value, it would be 1996 before sufficient debt service would accrue annually to service the $10 million in airport bonds. Under version B, assuming annual growth of 5 percent, the amount probably would be realized by 1991 . Mr. Obie voiced the conclusion that that would not be a viable option because it was too far in the future. e MINUTES--City Council Dinner Session August 12, 1985 Page 6 , Mr. Wong said another option waul d be to take the existing debt and to refi- - nance and reschedule everything over the next 20 years, which would mean that the funds would come in sooner and the debt service would be levelled off. He said that analysis probably would not be too difficult. Mr. Holmer asked how callable the bonds were or if another refinance mechanism woul d be used. Mr. Wong sa id a new debt wou1 d be issued and most of it put into an escrow fund to payoff existing bonds. They wou1 d then be called as they become ava i1ab1e. He added that all bonds could not be called in now, but woul d have to go through some type of trust agreement. Mr. Wong sa id he would check on whether that would be subject to any arbitrage problems. Staff said the deadline for the November ballot was October 2. Two work sessions were scheduled for SeptenDer 10 and irrmediate1y following the elec- tion, with a public hearing at the regular Council meeting on September 23. Ms. Wooten surveyed menDers and said she thought it \\as safe to proceed under the assumption that the sales tax probably would fail. Mr. Ru ta n sa i d he thought the sessions would need to be fairly lengthy. Ms. Ba scorn asked whether the gas tax was just for Eugene, and she said she felt that encour- agement for including the rest of Lane County should begin soon. The meeting was adjourned at 7:10 p.m. e (Recorded by Les1 ie Scales) LS:ss/1820C e MINUTES--City Council Dinner Session August 12, 1985 Page 7 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT . 858 PEARl . .. e July 17, 1985 Gordon Ell i ott 4026 West 11th Avenue Eugene OR 97402 NUISANCE ABATEMENT AT 938 JEFFERSON STREET Notice is hereby given that the re~ains of the building described as a two-story, wood-frame house and the accumulation of machinery and other materials on the property addressed as 938 Jefferson Street (17-03-51-2 4 --05l00) constitutes a nuisance under Chapter 6 of the Eugene Code. Said property is declared to be a nuisance and a dangerous building under Eugene Code 8.005 203(b}and unsafe for the following reasons: l. The building because of extensive fire on July 15, 1985, is over 98 percent destroyed (EC Section 8.005 203[b]). e 2. Because of the fire, the remainder of the wood framing and contents of the structure are an attractive nuisance (EC Section 6.0l0[b]). 3. The property contains an accumulation of junk, rubbish, trash, litter, and debris in the form of old boards, building materials, containers, furniture, and other refuse matter deleterious to public health (EC Section 6.0l0[c]). . 4. The property contains an array of abandoned vehicles and trailers which constitute an attractive nuisance and potential danger to unauthorized persons (EC Section 6.0l0[b]). 5. The property contains conditions which attract or are likely to attract, feed or harbor, rats or mice (EC Section 6.0l5-6.035). 6. The condition of the property and the building in such a burned-out condition d~tracts from the appearance of the neighborhood and lessens the value of neighboring property thereby constituting a general nusiance. You, as the owner, have the responsibility to abate the nuisance within 14 days from the date of this notice pursuant to Eugene Code Section 6.080. Failure to abate the nuisance within 14 days may cause the City to abate the nuisance and charge the cost to you, or assess the cost against the property. e Gordon Ell i ott -. July 17, 1985 Page 2 e You, as the owner, have 10 days from July 17, 1985, the date of the notice, to protest this order to abate. You may pr~test by giving notice to the Finance Officer of the City of Eugene. Please call if you have questions. Si ncere1y, ;17: ;-Lu-// Lar 'Y E. Reed City Manager Designee Building Official LER:je/1355a -- -